Jebel Barkal as Royal Crown

Jebel Barkal as Royal Crown
As soon as ancient viewers had recognized a uraeus on the Jebel Barkal cliff, they would
surely, at the same moment, have tried to conceptualize the mountain as a great royal head or
crown emerging from the earth. We have an inkling of this already in the first Piankhy stela, in
which the king calls Amun by a unique epithet: Neb Nesut Tawy Dehen Wa’ab (“Lord of the
Thrones of the Two Lands of ‘Pure Cliff’ “) as opposed to the usual
Neb Nesut Tawy hery-ib Dju Wa’ab
(“Lord of the Thrones of the Two Lands, who is in Pure Mountain”). The word
dehen
has two meanings, both of which have been cleverly deployed here: “cliff” and
“forehead/forehead with uraeus.” In its spelling in the stela, the only determinative used is of a
head in profile, which would seem to name the mountain as the “Pure Forehead” (Reisner 1931,
90; Zibelius-Chen 1989, 198. Cf. also Adrom 2004). In stelae of the late Napatan kings Nastasen and Aktisanes (late fourth-early third centuries
BCE), we find occasional use of a hieroglyph in the shape of a dome from which rises a uraeus
(fig. 45). In most examples of its application, the sign appears as a determinative in the writing
of the city name "Napata" where it is used as a subsitute for more common determinatives
meaning “mountain.” From this context there is no doubt that the sign pictured Jebel Barkal, the
specific “mountain-with-uraeus” of Napata (Priese 1977, 261; Kendall 2008, 131). One
occurrence of this hieroglyph, however, is particularly revealing. This occurs in the lunette of
the Nastasen stela in lines accompanying the figure of the king’s mother, who is shown on the
left side (
fig. 46). The text informs us that the lady “gave the crown (i.e. to her son) in
Napata because her father (i.e. Amun) caused to be established (there) the
ka
of the crown of Re-Horakhty.” Here the Jebel Barkal hieroglyph is used as a determinative of
the word
ka
(“divine image/double”), which can only mean that the “divine image/double” of the “crown of
Re-Horakhty” was the mountain itself. In other words, the queen crowned her son at Jebel
Barkal, because Amun had made it in the shape of the royal crown! This remark is easily
understood when the mountain is seen from the northeast in the late afternoon light. In
silhouette it resembles a great royal head or crown with uraeus (
fig. 47a, b
). Since Re-Horakhty was the solar god closely associated with the king, ancient local
authorities would have determined that his crown (manifested in the profile of the mountain) had
to be worn by the Kushite monarchs, his earthly counterparts.
Fig. 45: The name of the god “Amun of Napata” as written several times on the stela of Nastasen
1/6
Jebel Barkal as Royal Crown
Fig 46: Drawing of the Stela
text written
of Nastasen
over the
(late
image
(Drawing
fourth
of century
the
byking’s
T. Kendall).
BCE).
mother.
Fig. 47a: Jebel Barkal, seen from the northeast side at sunset. The shape of the mountain is that
2/6
Jebel Barkal as Royal Crown
Fig. 47b: Profile of Shebitqo (Shabataka), from the chapel of Osiris-Hekadjet at Karnak. (Image re
Types of royal headgear that conformed closely to the shape of the skull are known to have
been worn by Egyptian royalty since the Fourth Dynasty. Davies (1982) has shown that such
crowns, worn by kings from the late Middle Kingdom, were called khepresh, which was the
name of - and evolved into - the well-known “Blue Crown” near the start of Dynasty 18 (See also
Bryan 2007). Leahy (1992), who tracked the later history of both the “cap” and Blue Crowns,
concluded that their histories were continuous from the New Kingdom, and that “cap crowns”
became standard royal headwear in the eighth and seventh centuries BCE in both Kush and
Egypt and were not unique or original to the Kushite rulers – with the exception of the detail of
the double uraeus. As he stated (1992, 237):
3/6
Jebel Barkal as Royal Crown
“[The cap crown] enjoyed considerable popularity in the Ramesside Period, and continued to be
shown between then and the arrival of the Kushites, who …then gave special prominence to it. Those who believe the Kushite headgear to be different have to argue that the very strong
similarities to this traditional Egyptian cap are coincidental.”
I would argue that because at least seven centuries earlier the Egyptians, too, had been aware
of a “uraeus” on Jebel Barkal, we probably should at least be prepared to entertain a suspicion
that one or another Egyptian forms of the cap crown, known since the Eighteenth Dynasty, may
also have consciously imitated the shape of Jebel Barkal (figs. 48). Preposterous as this may
seem to many Egyptologists, I will demonstrate below that, soon after its discovery by the
Egyptians, Jebel Barkal became an important center of kingship and coronation ritual - just as it
did later during Dynasty 25 and Napatan times in Kush - and it became a place, virtually
identical to Luxor Temple, identified as a source of kingship and the royal
ka
(See III, H). (On the history of the Kushite crowns, see Török 1987.)
Fig. 48: Head thought to represent a late Ramesside king or a high priest of Amun, possibly Her
4/6
Jebel Barkal as Royal Crown
Iconography
observed
again
royal
represents
gods
dome-shaped
at
consort
). sandstone
object
concealed
opening
possessed
in
apparently
fig.
).
Fig.
relief
Jebel
We
33c
50a,
49a:
49
tomb
believed
suggested
encounter
originally
with
Tefnut,
b:
Barkal,
of
bat
Figure
behind
shrine
Drawing
Beg.
symbolizing
the
aleast
mirrored
of
deified
uraeus
inlay
to
naos. Jebel
showing
contained
which
N.
dwell
by
the
three
found
with
a11
plaque
the
removable
Jebel
showing
on
dome
figures
Barkal
Of
in
is
within
head
the
more
its
image
in
that
cast
carved
the
Barkal
B
afront. (lacking
“Eye
shape
seated,
derived
North
500,
in
of
they,
the
times
metal,
the
of
door,
the
the
in
of
mountain
On
apresiding
which
again,
deified
too,
relief
cemetery
Re”/”Eye
god
king,
in
the
shape
this
cast
from
either
once
Kushite
were
uraeus,
of
must
with
door
followed
now
metal
the
indeterminate
Jebel
fitted
of
(Kendall
side
over
occupants
of
at
an
the
aforementioned
have
panel
translated
art. Horus”
Meroë
which
(?)
image
of
and
registers
Barkal
Jebel
by
the
figure
That
been
(also
2008,
lioncemented
may
(fig.
door,
in
of
of
Barkal
the
to
in
sex
made
her
of
the
lost)
and
of
the
131-133). have
three-dimensions,
context,
49a,
the
mountain
the
smaller
pictured
transformations
enthroned
mountain
human-headed
dome-shaped
would
as
into
god
hieroglyph,
surface
b). been
a the
(now
model
figures,
facing
This
almost
Another
ina
was
rabbeted
the
(god
separate
oflost),
figure
the
seen
of
chapel
acertainly
recognizable
Shu
suggesting
hieroglyph
(the
in
group
example
goddesses,
shrine
which
a
apparently
arectangular
and
mountain.
inlay),
hollow
“head”
reliefs
of
is
have
had
his
is
carved
gods
can
found
the
is
of
as
been
This
be
the
mountain
believed to
p
Fig. 50a-b: Dome-shaped sandstone shrine as a model of Jebel Barkal, inscribed with the throne
5/6
Jebel Barkal as Royal Crown
6/6